A divided US Supreme Court cast doubt on Monday over calls to limit the ability of the federal government to communicate with social media platforms and the news media about publishing third-party content on controversial or potentially dangerous topics like vaccines, election interference, and terrorism.
It's got these big clubs available to it and it's so it's treating Facebook and these other platforms like their subordinates,' said Justice Samuel Alito. But others on the bench took another approach. 'Your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government, in significant ways in the most important time periods,' Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson told the lawyer representing Louisiana, Missouri and the private plaintiffs.
Terrorists engage in things that come under the First Amendment. Let's say they're just recruiting people for their organizations' online, she asked. 'There's all kinds of things that can appear on these platforms that do all kinds of different harms, and the inability of government that you're suggesting to reach out to these platforms and say: we want to give you information that you might not know about on this.
The court laid out new rules on the free speech limits of government workers, and when their 'mixed use' social media accounts cross the line from personal; conduct to official business. The case argued Monday is Murthy v. Missouri . A decision is expected by early summer.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »
Source: NBCNewsHealth - 🏆 707. / 51 Read more »
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: Slate - 🏆 716. / 51 Read more »
Source: BreitbartNews - 🏆 610. / 51 Read more »